caylee? was cindy anthony's life better ? >> i called the deputy sheriffs. i found out my granddaughter has basketball taken. she has been missing for a month. her mother finally admitted she is missing. i want her here now. >> 4973 what. >> hope spring. my daughter finally admitted that the baby isn't there. i need to find her.

>> your daughter admitted that the baby is there? >> they took her months ago, thigh daughter has been looking for her. i told you my daughter was missing for a month, i just found her today, i can't find my granddaughter. she just admitted to me she has been trying to find hernandez self. there is something wrong. i found my daughter's car today and it spells like there's been a dead body in the ... car. >> what is the 3-year-old's na name? >> was george anthony's life better? mr. ashton went over what george anthony's life was like as a result of losing his beloved grand daughter. whose life was better?

that's the only question you need to answer when considering why caylee marie anthony was left on the side of the road dead. there is your answer. >> ladies and gentlemen of the jury we are going to take a brief recess. when you return you will hear the final instructions on the law from the court.

we'll be in recess. jon: wow, a powerful summation from linda brane burdick the pros kwaoeurt and jefprosecutor. good morning to you i'm jon scott. >> reporter: i am molly line. fox news alert on the casey anthony murder trial. high drama inside the courtroom today as the prosecution gets the final word, playing casey's own words in an angry phone call from jail and cindy anthony's frantic 911 call reporting her granddaughter caylee was missing. phil is live in orlando for us. phil, what is the central theme of the prosecution's rebuttal today. >> reporter: the theme is to villainize casey anthony.

linda brane burdick put on a jailhouse conversation she had with her mother and father as well as that very first jailhouse phone call casey anthony made to her home within the orange county jail. she sees her mom on the television screens there, the eveng newscast, what is happening, that she saw her mother basically saying she doesn't know what the truth is at that point, this is after a day full of lie, after lie, after lie to investigators by casey anthony. right now jose baez inside the courtroom is motions again for a mistrial. they have motioned for mistrial throughout this six-week trial, about five or six times. most pointedly for the time they played that graphic animated video that showed casey's face next to her daughter caylee which morphed into caylee's skull supper imposed with duct tape over it.

if we can take a listen in the courtroom, this is jose baez tkefrpb counsel. >> miss anthony did not testify. and tdefense counsel. >> miss casey did not testify and to make improper arguments, for those purposes we would make a motion for mistrial. >> motion tor for mistrial deni. >> mr. mason, turn the speaker off, please, sir. >> verdict form complete package missing the two special finding ones. you got the last once, right? o?

>> mr. mason you may also want to inspect the verdict forms that i will be reading to the jury to make sure those are the same ones that we discussed yesterday. i would need them back, but please inspect them. while uri viewing those the rules of criminal procedure provides that there are certain instructions i need to give the alternate jurors because of the nature of this particular case. the instructions specifically provide that they are to remain in the courtroom, and that i am to give them the instructions. generally that's what i generally do. this case is somewhat unusual in

the sense of media and public interest. what i've done in the past is i will do that, they will go out of that front door, and then they'll go about their business. this particular case they cannot do this. this is what i propose to do. i have made arrangements with the court deputies that i will excuse those individuals, but they will go through the same door with the rest of the jurors, but they will be promptly taken down to a location in this building, they will be held there, and i will go with the court reporter if you or the state want one representative present you can, and then i will instruct them, but they will still be

sequestered until there will be a verdict in this particular case. but there are some special instructions that i'm going to need to give them, particularly in light of the fact of bookers who have arrived in time trying to boo jurors for shows. any objections from the state of florida? >> no, urns, that sounds fine. >> any objections from the defense? >> not from the defense. >> okay

>> okay to the audience, when i return back in the next ten minutes i will give the jury their final instructions. no one will be permitted to leave. so if you want to leave, my suggestion is you leave now because you will not be permitted to leave, get up, walk around, do anything. court deputies have been instructed if someone does that they will deal with you accordingly. so if you want to leave, now is theime to leave and not return, okay? we will be in recess for ten minutes.

>> reporter: that is judge perry, they are wrapping up the ginning of a discussion about what will happen when he returns after a short recess to begin jury instructions talking about the intense media presence that is there, and outside the courtroom. and instructions that will come to the jurors not to talk to the folks. we have phil keating in orlando. we know you got interrupted, phil we want to get back to you. >> reporter: hi, molly 4th of july, the holiday and that is the day for 25-year-old casey anthony that the jury has spent six weeks sequestered, living and breathing every piece of evidence in this murder trial, she is accused of killing her then 2-year-old daughter caylee two summers ago in orlando. they will begin deliberating whether she gets the death penalty, whether she is convicted of a lesser felony murder, second degree or possibly manslaughter and the other four charges that are in

play here right around noon today, and then they will deliberate in the jury deliberations room until 6:30pm, where they will break for the evening to return tomorrow at 8:30, or if they reach a verdict faster than that then we will all quickly reassemble here to the courthouse. inside the courtroom this morning casey anthony just stone-faced for much of the day, expressionless for most of the arguments by the prosecution team for the state of florida. linda drane burdick painting her as a pathological liar and trying to leave a lasting impression, the final impression this jury takes into the deliberations room as a woman who wanted to live a life free of the burden of a child. take a listen to this excerpt. >> no person would ever make the accidental death of a child look

like murr. the defendant's actions during those 31 days, and her response to this are completely inconsistent with what people do 100% of the time. >> reporter: linda drane burdick, reminding this jury, reminding them that -- they played the interview with the investigators, the initial interview after caylee was then missing, where the detective, who is going through lie, after lie, after lie that he had already checked out and didn't pan out, for example this location of an apartment where the nanny supposedly had caylee, and nobody lived there by that name forever, actually, in fact that apartment had been vacant for a longtime. he even suggested to casey anthony right there, you know, i've dealt with a lot of missing children, and you know what, a lot of accidents happen and they

turned out to be this. and this. and that, he even mentioned accidental drowning. casey anthony did not jump on that opportunity to say this was an accidental drowning. and then linda drane burdick played the jailhouse visitation with george and cindy anthony with their daughter casey and this was several weeks after massive media coverage of the case. somebody in the media mentioned maybe caylee had died accidentally in a swimming pool drowning. and casey anthony's reaction was, surprise, surprise, showing three years had passed and not once did casey anthony mention accidental drowning until the first day of this trial six weeks ago. >> reporter: thank you so much, phil keating in orlando who has been following every step of this trial as it draws to a close. jon: the jury isbout to get the case in the casey anthony murder trial. we'll tell you what she'll be facing if she is found guilty on any or all of the charges against her. could she walk?

>> i am in camp leather neck. i want to give a shot out t my momma, my daddy and all my babies back home, i love you, miss you and i'll be back home soon. . my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. i never really thought i would make money doing what i love. [ shapiro ] we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. to legalzoom.com today and make your busins dream a reality. at legalzm.com put the laon your side.

an accident doesn't have to slow you down. with better car replacement, available only with berty mutual auto insurance, if your car is totaled, we give you the money for a ca one model year newer. to learn more, visit us today. responsibility. what's your policy?

jon: she has watched the jurors gentlemen closely throughout the trial. juice and i want to begin with the end. everybody i think wondered how the prosecution would wrap-up its rebuttal argument and they wrapbd it uwrapped it up this wa very powerful image i felt of casey anthony partying after her daughter had already disappeared. they have a image of that tattoo that they got. bella vida, the good life, on her shoulder. what is the effect when that is the final image that these jurors see? >> what i feel like linda drane burdick did is planted the seed and redirected right back from the very beginning.

as i shared earlier, this whole case is really about casey's demeanor and the deception and lies, and how she misdirected, how she avoided and dodged all the time throughout this entire investigation trying to find caylee. so what they did was, is kind of crystallize and focus right back from the very beginning, about lies, deceit and more lies. jon: she doesn't come across as a sympathetic figure in some of the tapes that were played today. the phone call from the jailhouse on the day that she got arrested when she is throwing around so many f-bombs, because you know that kind of language is not customarily played in america news rooms. >> that is correct. i watched a lot of the videos from the very beginning. the most important was was the one where she says, surprise, surprise, when the newest information out was she had drowned in the pool. there was no sympathy there.

casey knew she lied. one of the things is that these are what we call verbal deseptembedeceptors. -ts body lguage does it tie together? do the facl expressions tell us the story. 97% of how we communicate is nonverbally. you put in the words and it's a slam-dunk by the state to focus on her demeanor and lies. jon: we've seen her in the courtroom, dabbing her eyes with a tissue, snif sniffling. shaking her head at testimony she disagreed with. do you think it's been effective for the jurs? >> i don't think it is. i think over time they found out, they've seen her whether she has really broken down on cried. they figured out the focus is on her, her own personal grieving about herself and she's been caught in some of her lies so when it comes to the

compasonate trueness, that real believable compassion about her daughter and missing her daughter, it's just not there, it's vacant. over time they have seen the many faces of casey anthony and have been able to read through the tears of what is real, and what is not and what's contrived. jon: i know you've gone through this jury one by one as a jury analyst was. you'veiven us a break down of who these people are and what kind of arguments you think will appeal to them. given the arguments that have been put forth by the defense and the prosecution, who do you think for this jury in particular, who do you think did the better job of swaying them? i believe that the prosecution did. first of all the forensic evidence was sverwhelming. when you look at the juror profile we are not looking 12 jurors with graduate degrees. we have a very strong miss that have high school graduation. one of them didn't get past high school. we have one with a master's

degree. other than that when you're looking at they are demographic profile. i did scientific jury selection. i was able to indicate there westbound seven jurors on this pool that were proprosecution. four more defense and one may have been a possible sway juror and so i did both subjective and objective tying it together to see if it makes sense and i believe the state is actually going to win in this case. jon: susan constantine, a jury expert. thank you for your insights throughout this trial. >> reporter: we are waiting now for judge perry when the court resumes after a short recess to give instructions to the jury. he has said these instructions might be a little bit different because of the media presence there and we will hear that in the moments when we return.

molly: we are waiting for the judge to instruct the jury in the casey anthony trial. they will then begin deliberating in the capital murder case. will the jury buy the prostitution's implication that casey anthony is a liar. if they do they have a new options when it comes to the charges. casey is facing proceed meditated murder in the first-degree that could send her to prison for life, or put or on death row. felony murder with aggravated child abuse. aggravated manslaughter caused by child abuse, which carries a 30 year sense. aggravated child abuse separately which could send casey to 30 years. and lying to police officers where she could get up to 4 years behind bars. we a panel to discuss what we saw the last couple of days. the prosecution has made the argument that the defense's argument are absurd.

jeff ashton saying that people don't make accidents look like murder. let's start with you, phillip, what do you think? >> i absolutely agree. i think the defense made a mistake about making this trial about a choice. the law requires that the murder never shifts from the defendant -- i'm sorry, to the defendant. the defendant shouldn't have to prove anything. by making it a choice. molly: stand by just a moment. we are actually seeing the judge taking a seat. he is about to insuct the jury, so let's take a hreupbs. >> in thia listen. >> in this e ed ed caseee marie anthony is charged with first-degreeurr. murder in the first-degree includes the lesser crimes of murder in the second degree, manslaughter and third degree felony murder, all of which are

unlawful. a killing that is excusable or was committed by the use of justifiable deadly force is lawful. if you find caylee marie anthony was killed by casey marie anthony you will then consider the circumstances surrounding the killing in deciding if the killing was murder of the first-degree, or was furnished in the second degree, or manslaughter, or third degree felony murder, or whether the killing was excusable or resulting from justifiable use of deadly force. the killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder, or commit a felony upon the

defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing. the kill of a human being is excusable and therefore lawful under any one of the following three circumstances. one, when the killing is committed by accident and misfortune and doing any lawful acts by lawful means and using ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent or, two, when the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or three, when the killing is committed by accident and

misfortune resulting from a sudden combat if a dangerous weapon is not used, and the killing is not done in a cruel and unusual manner. i'll now insuct you on the circumstances that must be proved before casey marie anthony may be found guilty of murder in the first-degree, aggravated child abuse, aggravatedanslaughter of a child and four counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer, or any lesser included crime. murder in the first-degree. there are two ways in which a person may be convicted of first-degree murder, one is known as premeditated murder, and the other is known as felony murder. in order to find the defendant

guilty of murder in the first-degree the state must convince you beyond a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt of either premeditated murder or felony murder. while you must all agree that the state has proven first-degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt, you need not be unanimous in your opinion as to whether that finding is based on premeditated murder, or felony murder, and i shall now define those terms. to prove the crime of first-degree, premeditated murder, the state must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, caylee marie anthony is dead. two, the death was caused by the

criminal act of casey marie anthony. three, there was a premeditated killing of caylee marie anthony. an act includes a series related actions arising from and perform pursuant to a single design or purpose. killing with pmeditation is killing after consciously deciding to do so. ththe decision must be present n the mind at the time of the killing. the law does not fix the exact period of time that must pass between the formation of the premeditated intent to kill and the killing. the period of time must be long enough to allow reflection by the defendant. the premeditated intent to kill must be formed before the

killing. the question of premeditation is a question of fact to be determined by you from the evidence. it would be sufficient proof of premeditation if the circumstances of the killing, and the conduct of the accused convince you beyond a reasonable doubt of the existence of premeditation at the time of the killing. first-degree felony murder. to prove the crime of first-degree felony murder the state must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, caylee marie anthony is dead. two, the death occurred as a consequence of and while casey marie anthony was engaged in the

commission of aggravated child abuse, or the death occurred as a consequence of and while casey marie anthony was attempting to commit aggravated child abuse. three, casey marie anthony was the person who actually killed caylee marie anthony. in order to convict of first-degree felony murder it is not necessary for the state to prove that the defendant had a premeditated design or in tenth to kill. to prove the crime of aggravated child abuse the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, casey marie anthony knowingly and willfully committed child abuse upon caylee marie anthony and in doing so caused great bodily

harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement. two, caylee marie anthony was under the age of 18 years. willfully means intentionally, knowingly and purposely. child abuse means the intentional infliction of physical or mental injury upon a child or an intentional abt that could reasonably be expected to result in physical or mental injury to a child or active encouragement of any person to commit an act that results or could reasonably be expected to result in physical or mental injury to a child.

aggravated manslaughter of a child. to prove the crime of aggravated manslaughter of a child the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, casey marie -- caylee marie anthony is dead. two, casey marie anthony's abt or actactor acts caused the deaf caylee marie anthony, or the death of caylee m marie anthony was caused by the culpable negligence of casey marie anthony. i will now define culpable negligence nor you. each of us has a duty to act

reasonably towar others. if there is a violation of that duty without any conscious intent to harm, that violation is negligence. but culpable negligence is more than a failure to use ordinary care towards others. in order for negligence to be culpable it must be gross and flagrant. culpable negligence is a course of conduct showing reckless disregard of human life or of the safety of persons exposed to its dangerous effects, or such an entire won't of care to rice a pre sum -gs to a conscious disregard or con husband necessary or shows a wantonness and disregard of the safety of the public, or such an

indifference to the rights of others as is equivalent to an intentional violation of such rights. the negligent act oro mission musor omissionmust have been coh disregard for the safety of others. culpable negligence is conscious lee doing an act or following a course of conduct that the defendant must have known or reasonably should have known was likely to cause death or great bodily harm. if you find the defendant guilty of aggravated manslaughter of a child you must then determine whether the state has further proved beyond a reasonable doubt that caylee marie anthony was a child whose death was caused by the neglect of casey marie anthony, a caregiver.

child means any person under the age of 18 years. caregiver means a parent, adult household member, or other person responsible for a child's welfare. neglect of a child means a caregiver's failure or omission to provide a child with care, supervisionnd services necessary to maintain a child's physical and mental health including but not limited to food, nutrition, clothing, shelter, supervision, medicine, and medical services that a prudent person would consider essential for the well-being of the child. repeated conduct or a single incident or omission by a caregiver that results in or

could reasonably be expected to result in a substantial risk of death of a child may be considered in determining neglect. false information to a law enforcement officer. to prove the crime of false information to a law enforcement officer the state must prove the following five elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, uri p are melich was conducting a missing person's investigation. uri melich was a law enforcement officer. casey marie anthony knew that yuri melich was a law enforcement officer.

four, casey marie anthony knowingly gave false information to yuri melich, five, casey marie anthony intended to mislead yuri melich the investigation. willing three means knowingly, and purposely. in considering evidence you should consider the possibility that although the evidence may not convince you that the defendant committed the main crimes of which she is accused, there may be evidence that she committed other acts that would constitute a lesser included crime. therefore, if you decide that the main accusation has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, you will next need to decide if the defendant i guilty of any lesser included crime. the lesser crimes indicated in

the definition of first degree murder are second-degree murder, manslaughter, or third degree murder. the lesser crime indicated in the definition of aggravated child abuse is child abuse, second-degree murder. to prove the crime of second-degree murder the state must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, caylee marie anthony is dead. two, the death was caused by the criminal act of casey marie anthony, three, there was an unlawful killing of caylee marie anthonyy an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.

a life includes a series of related actions arising from and performed pursuant to a single design or purpose. an act is imminently dangerous and demonstrates a depraved mind if it is an act or series of acts that, one, a person of ordinary judgment should know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another and, two, is done from ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent and, three, is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life. in order to convict of the crime of second-degree murder it is not necessary for the state to prove the defendant had an intent to causeeath.

manslaughter. to proffer the crime of manslaughter the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, caylee marie anthony is dead. two, casey marie anthony's act or acts caused the death of caylee marie anthony or the death of caylee marie anthony was caused by the culpable negligence of casey marie anthony. however, the defendant cannot be guilty of manslaughter if the killing was either justifiable or excusable homicide. the killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while attempting resisting an attempt

to murder or commit a felony upon the defendant or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing. the killing of a human being is excusable and therefore lawful under any one of the following three circumstances. one, when the killing is committed by accident or misfortune and doing any lawful act by lawful means using ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or two, when the willing occurred by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion upon any sudden and sufficient provocation or three, when the killing is committed by accident or misfortune resulting from sudden combat if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner. in order to convict of

manslaughter by act it is not necessary for the state to pve the defendant had an intent to cause death, only an intent to commit an act that was not justified or excusable or which caused death. i will now define culpable negligence for you. each of us has a duty to fact reasonably towards others. if there is a violation of that duty without any conscious intention to harm that violation is negligence. but culpable negligence is more than a failure to use ordinary care towards others. in order for negligence to be culpable it must be gross and flagrant. culpable negligence is showing a disregard for persons exposed to

its dangerous respects and shows wantonness or recklessness or a gross careless disregard of the safety and welfare of the publ public. with such an indifference to the rights of others as equivalent to an intentional violation of such rights. the negligent act or omission must have been committed with utter disregard for the safety of others. culpable negligence is consciously doing an act or following a course of conduct that the defendant must have known or reasonably should have known was likely to cause death or great bodily injury. to prove the crime of third degree felony murder the state must prove the following three

elements beyond a reasonable doubt. caylee marie anthony is dead. two, the death occurred as a consequence of and while casey marie anthony was engaged in the commission of child abuse. or the death occurred as a consequence of and while casey marie anthony was attempting to commit child abuse. three, casey marie anthony was the person who actually killed caylee marie anthony. it is not necessary for the state to prove the killing was perpetrated with a design to effect death. child abuse means the intentional infliction of physical or mental injury upon a child, or an intentional act that could reasonably be expected to result in physical or mental injury to a child when

the person knowingly or willfully abused the child without causing great bodily harm, permanent disability, or memory disfigurement to a child. willfully means intentionally, knowingly and purposefully. in order to prove that the defendant attempted to commit the crime of child abuse the state must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt. one, casey marie anthony did some act towards committing the crime of child abuse that went beyond just thinking or talking about it. two, she would have committed the crime except that someone prevented her from committing the crime of child abuse, or she failed. it is not an attempt to commit child abuse if the defendant abandoned her attempt to commit the offense or otherwise prevented its commission under

circumstances indicating a complete and voluntary renunciation of a criminal purpose. child abuse. to prove the crime of child abuse the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt. one, casey marie anthony intentionally inflicted physical or mental injury upon caylee marie anthony, or committed an intentional act that could reasonably be expected to result in physical or mental injury to caylee marie anthony. two, the victim was under the age of 18 years.

the defendant has entered a plea of not guilty. this means you must presume or believe the defendant is innocent. the presumption stays with the defendant as to each material allegation in the indictment through each stage of the trial unless it has been overcome by the evidence to the exclusion of and beyond a reasonable doubt. to overcome the defendant's presumption of innocence the state has the burden of proving the crime with which the defendant is charged was committed, and the defendant is the person who committed the crime. the defendant is not required to present evidence or to prove anything. whenever the words reasonable doubt are used you must consider the following: a reasonable

doubt is not amir possible doubt, a speculative imaginary or forced doubt. such a doubt does not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt. on the other hand, if after carefully considering, compari comparing, and weighing all the evidence there is not an abiding conviction of guilt or if having a conviction it is one which is not stable, but one which waivers and vacillates, then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable doubt and you must find the defendant not guilty because the doubt is reasonable. it is to the evidence introduced in this trial and to it alone that you are to look for that proof. a reasonable doubt as to the

guilt of the defendant may arise from the evidence, conflict in the evidence, or lack of evidence. if you have a reasonable doubt you should find the defendant not guilty. if you have no reasonable doubt you should find the defendant guilty. it is up to you to decide what evidence is reliable. you shod use your common-sense in deciding which is the best evidence, and which evidence should not be relied upon in considering your verdict. you may find some of the evidence not reliable or less reliable than other evidence. you should consider how the witnesses acted, as well as what they said. some things you should consider are, did the witness seem to

have an opportunity to see and know the things about which the witness testified? did the witness seem to have an accurate memory? was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys' questions? did the witness have some interest in how the case should be decided? does the witnesses' testimony agree with the other testimony and other evidence in the case? has the witness been offered or received any money, preferred treatment or other benefit in order to get the witness to testify? has any pressure or threat been used against the witness that affected the truth of the witness' testimony? did the witness at some other time make a statement that is inconsistent with the defendant he or she gave in court?

you may rely upon your own conclusions about the witness. a juror may believe or disbelieve all or any part of the evidence or the testimony of any witness. when ththe evidence concerning e searches. it is up to you to decide what evidence is reliable. use your common-sense to decide what evidence to regard. you may find some evidence more reliable or less reliable than others. some things you should consider in evaluating canine searches are: one, the canine's training and certificate records, certification records including

and explanation of the meaning of the particular training and certification. two, the field performance records, including any unverified alerts. three, the experience and training of the officer handling the canine as well as any other objective evidence known to the officer about the canine's reliability. you may rely upon your own conclusions about this type of evidence. a juror may believe or disbelieve all or any part of the evidence or the testimony. expert witnesses are like other witnesses with one exception. the law permits an expert witness to give his or her opinion. however, an expert's opinion is only reliable when given on a

subject about which you believe he or she to be an expert. like other witnesses you may believe or disbelieve all or any part of an expert's testimony. the constitution requires the state to prove these accusations against the defendant. it is not necessary for the defendant to disprove anything, nor is the defendant required to prove her innocence. it is up to the state to prove the defendant's guilt by evidence. the defendant exercised a fundamental right by choosing not to be a witness in this case. you must not view this as an admission of guilt or be influenced in any way by her decision. no juror should ever be concerned that the defendant did or did not take the witness

stand to give testimony inhe case. statements claimed to have been made by the defendant outside of court have been placed before you. such a statement should always be considered with caution and be weighed with great care to make certain it was freely and voluntarily made. therefore, you must determine from the evidence that the defendant's alleged statements were knowingly, voluntarily and freely made. in making this determination you should consider the total circumstances, including but not limited to, one, when the defendant made the statement whether she had been threatened in order to get her to make it, and two, whether anyone had promised her anything in order to get her to make it. if you conclude that the

defendant's out-of-court statements -- statement was not freely and voluntarily made you should disregard it. these are some general rules that apply to your discussions. you must volume these rules in order to return a lawful verdict. you must follow the law as it is set out in these instructions. if you fail to follow the law your verdict would be a miscarriage of justice. there is no reason for failing to follow the law in this case. all of us are dependent upon you to make a wise and legal decision in this matte this case must be decided only upon the evidence that you have heard from the testimony of witnesses, and have seen in the forms of exhibits in evidence,

and these instructions. this case must not be decided for or against anyone because you fl sorry for anyone or are angry at anyone. remember, t lawyers are not on trial. your feelings about them should not influence your decision in this case. your duty is to determine if the defendant has been proven guilty or not in accord with the law. whatever verdict you render must be unanimous, that is each juror must agree to the same verdict. it is entirely proper for a lawyer to talk to a witness about what testimony the witness would give if called to the courtroom. the witness should not be discredited by talking to a lawyer about his or her testimony. your verdict should not be influenced by feelings of

prejudice, by as, o bias, sympa. your verdict must be based on the law contained in these instructions. deciding a verdict is exclusively your job. i cannot participate in that decision in any way. please disregard anything i may have said or done that makes you think i prefer one verdict over another. you may find the defendant guilty as charged in the indictment or guilty of such lesser included crimes as the evidence may justifies, or not guilty. if you return a verdict of guilty it should be for the highest offense which has been

proven beyond a reasonable doubt. if you find no offense has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then of course your verdict must be not guilty. only one verdict may be returned as to each crime charged. this verdict must be unanimous, that is all of you must agree to the same verdict. the verdict must be in writing and for your convenience the necessary forms of verdicts have been prepared for you. they are as follows: the verdict as to count one, first degree murder, we the jury find the defendant guilty of first degree murder as charged in the indictment. we the jury find the defendant guilty of the lesser included offense of second degree murder.

we the jury, find the defendant guilty of the lesser included offense of manslaughter. we the jury, find the defendant guilty of the lesser included offense of third degree felony murder. we the jury, find the defendant not guilty. so say we all, dated in orlando, orange county, florida on this blank date of july. when you have arrived at a decision your foreperson will execute the verdict form by checking the space adjacent to the statement that reflects your verdict, date and sign the verdict form. the verdict as to count two, aggravated child abuse. we the jury nd the defendant guilty of ag aggravated child ae as charged in the indictment. we the jury find the defendant guilty of the lesser included offense of child abuse. we the jury find the defendant

not guilty. so say we all, dated in orlando, orange county, florida. verdict as to count 3, aggravated manslaughter of a child. we the jury find the defendant guilty of aggravated manslaughter of a child as charged in the indictment. we the jury find the defendant guilty of the lesser included offense of manslaughter. we the jury find the defendant not guilty, so say we all, following that there is some special findings as to count 3. special findings. we the jury find that casey marie anthony was a caregiver for caylee marie anthony at the time of the offense. we the jury find that casey marie anthony was not a caregiver for caylee marie anthony at the time of the

offense. so say we all,ated in orlando, orange county, florida. special finding number 2 as to count 3. we the jury find that caylee marie anthony was under the age of 18 years of age at the time of the offense. we the jury find that caylee marie anthony was not under 18 years of age at the time of the offense. so say we all, dated at orlando, orange county, florida. the verdicts as to counts 4, 5 and 6. we the jury find the defendant guilty of providing false information to a law enforcement officer as charged in the indictment. we the jury find the defendant not guilty.

that's 4, 5, 6 and 7. a separate crime is charged in each count ever the indictment and why they help have been tried together each crime and the evidence applicable to it must be considered separately and a separate verdict returned as to each. a finding of guilty or not guilty as to one crime must not affect your verdict as to the other crimes charged. in just a few moments you will be taken to the jury room by the court deputy. the first thing you should do is elect a foreperson. the foreperson presides over

your deliberations like a chairman of a meeting. it is the foreperson's job to sign and date the verdict form when all of you have agreed on a verdict in this case. the foreperson will bring the verdict form back to the courtroom when you return. a verdict finding the defendant either guilty or not guilty must be unanimous. the verdict must be the verdict of each juror, as well as the jury as a whole. during deliberations jurors must communicate about the case only with one another, and only when all jurors are present in the jury room. you are not to communicate with any person outside the jury about this case. until you have reached a verdict you must not talk about this case in person, or through the telephone, writing, or electronic communications such

as a blog, twitter, email, text message, or any other means. do not contact anyone to assist in your deliberations. these communication rules apply until i discharge you at the end of the case. if you become aware of any violation of these instructions, or any other instructions i have given in this case you must tell me by giving a note to the court deputy. in closing, let me remind you that it is important that you follow the law spelled out in these instructions in deciding your verdict. there are no other laws that apply to this case. even if you do not like the

laws, you must use them -- correction. even if you do not like the laws that must be applied, you must use them. for two centuries we have agreed to a constitution and to live by the law. no juror has the right to violate rules we all share. ladies and gentlemen of the jury, as you proceed to retire and begin your deliberations five of your number will separate from you at this time. that will be done back in the jury room, and they will be

taken to a separate area where i will give them some additional instructions. members of the jury, you may retire now to begin your deliberations. molly: we have just listened to judge belvin perry instructing the jury in the casey anthony trial in orlando. they will now head back to the quarters where they will begin discussion after they choose a foreperson and they have a number of things to look at. chief among them is premeditation. let's bring back john patrick dolan and phillip ray. thank you for standing by as the judge instructed the jury, we appreciate it. let's talk about that issue of premeditation to start with. has the prosecution done their job in the sense of proving first-degree here? have they shown that casey anthony killed caylee on purpose and that there was preplanning

involved? phillip let's start with you. >> i absolutely think they have. i think the crime scene makes it clear that this was a homicide. the child's body lay in repose as the vines grew up through her and the leaves fell down upon her, that duct tape was still there, with the cotton deteriorating with the body composing you put yourself in a position to know just by that showing that the duct tame with us on the child's face at the time that the child died. you know then it's a popl side. someone planned to kill that child. premeditation means specifically you thought about it, you thought of how to do it. it doesn't mean you have to have a month to month plan, but the chloroform vapor in the trunk of the car after the trunk had been left over to air out for hours by the family indicates that that was a planned murder. molly: there are a number of options, other verdicts that the jury could come down with.

i want to bring in john on this. what are you thoughts? do you think they'll come back with first degree murder or one of the lesser charges, second or manslaughter. >> i couldn't disagree more with my esteemed colleague. if you look at the evidence and not the inferences or assertions of the prosecution. no forensic pathologist or expert has testified that the duct tape caused the death. it is an inference on the part of the prosecution. that possible it of evidence is going to be a problem for the prosecution. the lesser includeds are more likely. possibly second degree or manslaughter is what will come out. molly: what about the argument the prosecution made when they wrapped up in rebuttal that the defense's side of things were just absurd. people don't try to make accidents, try to allege that there was a drowning mere, that people don't make accidents look like murder. phillip. >> well, think they are absolutely right. i don't think a child drowns in

the shorts and t-shirt that she was wearing that day. this is a child that didn't drown in pajamas or drowned in her bathing suit in a pool. if you think it's a drowning you have to believe that someone dressed that child definitely than she was in the pool and then apply the duct tape which was there and it's clear from the scene that the duct tape decayed as the child decayed in the woods. it doesn't milwaukee any sense at all. i think that is the mistake the defense made, because they made it about a choice. it had to be this story or that story. and by doing so they've told this absurd story in a way as the prosecution pointed out, you just can't believe it at all. so what is left? what's left is the child is dead in the woods, right where the mother put her. molly: all right, thank you, gentlemen. phillip ray a former prosecutor, and john patrick dolan a criminal defense attorney for sticking with us today and listening to this trial and weighing in. we appreciate it. jon. jon: we will be back to the aftermath if you want to call it that of the casey anthony trial

in just a bit, getting some expert looks at what lies ahead as this jury finally retires to deliberate. but there is als other news to cover today, including the way forward in afghanistan, a look at that when we return. [ malannouncer ] imagine facing the day

with less chronic low back pain. imagine living your life with less chronic osteoarthritis pain. imagine you, with less pain. cymbalta can help. cymbalta is a non-narcotic treatment that's fda-approved to manage chronic musculoskeletal pain. one pill a day, every day, can help reduce this pain. tell your doctor right away if your mood worsens, you have unusual changes in mood or behavior or thoughts of suicide. antidepressants can increase these in children, teens, and young adults. cymbalta is not approved for children under 18. people taking maois or thioridazine or with uncontrolled glaucoma should not take cymbalta. taking it with nsaid pain relievers, aspirin, or blood thinners may increase bleeding risk. severe liver problems, some fatal, were reported. signs include abdominal pain and yellowing of the skin or eyes. talk with your doctor about your medicines, including those for migraine, or if you have high fever, confusion and stiff muscles, to address a possible life-threatening condition. tell your doctor about alcohol use, liver disease, and before you reduce or stop taking cymbalta. dizziness or fainting may occur upon standing.

side effects include nausea, dry mouth, and constipation. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor about cymbalta. imagine you, with less pain. cymbalta can help. go to cymbalta.com to learn about a free trial offer. is besabsorbed in small continuous amounts. only one calcium supplement does that in one daily dose. new citracal slow release... continuously releases calcium plus d for the efficient absorption my body needs. citracal.

jon: fox news alert. after a month and a half of courtroom activity the casey anthony trial has finally gone to the jury. jurors right now should be in the process of sitting down and for the first time since this whole thing began, through all those weeksf being sequestered, they are going to be allowed to talk about the case. let's bring in judge alex ferrer, he is the host of judge alex. always there are questions, judge about the judge's instructions to the jury. very often it becomes a point of appeal, the defense or the prosecution might try to appeal

the results of this case based on jury instructions. did you hear any glaring errors in what judge belvin perry read to the jury. >> no i didn't hear any glaring errors. there were standard instructions for the most part with a full tweaks here and there. that was the whole purpose of the charging congress that was interrupted and held again, to go overall the inc instructions. i know to everyone it sound like a quagmire of legal memorandum bomumbo-jumbo.at any time they a question, a legal question and he will clarify it for them. jon: i wouldn't want to be one of those 12 jurors, less than that i wouldn't want to be one of the five jurors. there are five people sitting in that box during the whole thing but essentially are being held hostage in case sw-b gets sick

who is on the panel of 12. tell us the circumstances under which one of those alternates mit be employed. >> any time that one of the 12 jurors is disqualified for any reason, maybe some wrongdoing, maybe on a bathroom break somebody approaches the juror and may say something that disqualifies the jurors. maybe the juror refuses to participate in the deliberations, which all jurors are required to participate in. if at any time you have that and you discharge all the alternates the case gets mistried and we have to do it all over again. nothing harder than sitting through the entire trial and not being able to deliberate. jon: the alternates have to sit in a room some place and wait until they are called in case they are needed. they won't be allowed to discuss the case as the deliberations proceed, right? >> no, they will not. i guess the only saving grace is, you know, these

deliberations are not likely to take that long. my estimate normally would have been two to three days. since they've been together for seven weeks already and they've already established relationships and know each other we can get a much quicker verdict, but, you know, it's hard to tell. there is a lot of complexity here. jon: you think that the jurors have probably already settled on the person who is going to be the foreperson, they kind of know the characteristics of the people they've been working with because they've had nothing except their own lives and backgrous to talk about, they cannot, or they should not up to this point have talked about the case, right? >> that's exactly right. so they probably know everything about each other at this point, and selection of a foreperson will probably be rather swift. jon: why do you think it will be a fairly quick verdict? i mean you, yourself, point out it's got some twists and turns, it's a complicated case in some respects. >> no, i'm not saying it will be a quick verdict, i am saying there is always that

possibility. normally would i have expected two to three days, however most trials don't last, you know, eight weeks. in that period of time they established the relationships, established the rapport with each other. there are people that are already bonded together. that's who they will go to immediately when they discuss and say what do you think. all the cliques. they have a lot to discuss, first-degree murder, second-degree murder. manslaughter, manslaughter with child abuse. that will slow it down. jon: thank you for sharing your expertise, judge alex. molly: new evidence different groups tied to al-qaida are starting to work together. the u.s. discussing changing terror threats in a post bin laden era. and casey anthony's fate is now

in the hands of jurors. more coming up. >> whose life was better? that's the only question you need to answer in considering why caylee marie anthony was left on the side of the road dead. [ p.a. announcer ] announcing america's favorite cereal is now honey nut cheerios! yup, america's favorite. so we're celebrating the honey sweetness, crunchy oats and... hey! don't forget me!! honey nut cheerios. make it your favorite too!

really? 25 gramof protein. what do we have? all four of us, together? 24. he's low fat, too, and has 5 grams of sugars. i'll believe it when i--- [ both ] oooooh... what's shakin'? [ female announcer ] as you get older, protein is an important part of staying active and strong. new ensure high protein... fifty percent of your daily value of protein. low fat and five grams of sugars. see? he's a good egg. [ major nutrition ] new ensure hh protein. ensure! nutrition in charge!

jon: we hope you are out enjoying your th o your 4th of l day today. but extraordinary security is in place across the country. drone strikes are being stepped up in yeah minimum and somalia will islam ache terrorist groups

are making closer ties and maybe plotting against the united states. let's bring in our expert. i am reminded it's a poll day, we want to relax, chill out and yet al-qaida and those types like to go after significant dates. if they could every christmas, every 4th of july, maybe even september 11th would be a day that they'd like to pull off an attack. >> absolutely . for security personnel particularly in places like new york city the calendar may say july 4th. it could be december 31st, new year as of eve. it's that significant event. a famous chinese philosopher says the art of war taoeufps us we should not rely on the fact that our enemy might not come but rely on our ability to receive them if they do. the minute you left down your guard is when we're most at risk. jon: we've killed osama bin laden, we are drawing down our

troops in afghanistan. i think there is a palpable feeling in the country that the war on terror is pretty well won. >> al-qaida has proven to be very opportunistic. they will use any opportunity they have, whether it's homegrown jihaddists, folks from other groups that band together and plan another platform to attack. the 9/11 attack probably will never happen again, it doesn't mean that there isn't something out there that they are coming to bring. jon: you say they are banding to the. >> they are banding to the. we're seeing it in north africa, in pakistan. in the very unstable areas of the world if they can go and thraeupb and come together. the question is can they bring the operatives to this country or work with people already in the country, what we call the inspired but not instructed, the home-grown guys. jon: i would think with all the satish kalpoe lights that we have, things that we weren't watching in afghanistan in the days up to 9/11 i think we'd be

looking out for that stuff. >> we absolutely are. they get better too. th have a complex financial system. they funnel money back and forth. they are looking to exploit different opportunities. la fall when they tried to put the packages on the planes to take out cargo, they are constantly evolving and it's always a cllenge for people like ray kelly in new york city to have that readiness always available. jon: as has been said so many times the terrorists only have to get lucky once, we have to be right one hundred percent of the time. >> ten years later there is mission fatigue. it's expected, it's natural. the question is how do you reinvigorate the whole security enterprise -pt how do you make sure you have the right strategic investments tt also provide for capability as well as capacity as well. jon: thank you. molly: deliberations underway in

the casey anthony trial, jurors sorting out which side proved its case and a massive manhunt underway for a gunman. >> you're supposed to prove cases beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. where do they get this stuff from? how can they ask you to do this? how can they come forward with this evidence? this junk? copd makes it hard to breathe, so i wasn't playing much of a role in my own life, but with advair, i'm breathing better so now i can take the lead on a science adventure. advair is clinically proven to help significantly improve lung function. unlike most copd medications, advair contains both an anti-inflammatory and a long-acting bronchodilator, workintogether to help improve ur lung function all day. advair won't replace fast-acting inhalersor sudden symptoms and should not be used more than twice a day people with copd taking advair may have a higher chance of pneumonia

advair may increase your risk of osteoporosis and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking advair. if youe still having difficulty breathing, take the lead. ask your doctor if incling advair get your first fl prescription free and save on refills at advaircopd.com.

mol mol a fox news alert, the jury is deliberating after prosecutors spent hours this morning taking their final shots at the evidence presented by the defense. how did they do? let's bring in dr. michael baden. thanks for joining us, doctor. >> hi, molly. good to talk to you. molly: let's start with the forensic evidence, the defense has try today make the prosecution look like they're putting on junk science.

how do you think they've done? have they proven their case? >> well, i think the prosecution's probably proven the case for the benefit of the jury, but thai used a lot of -- they've used a lot of bad science in doing it, and perhaps the worst is the cause of death. three forensic pathologists all testified there was not enough information, not enough evidence to say what the cause of death was. the death certificate says undetermined cause of death. so the doctor mr. ashton relied upon today in his statement on what he got an anthropologist to testify who's never done an autopsy, he's never issued a cause of death but who made that very inflammatory photographs of the head of the baby morphing into a skull and saying that, and showing how three pieces of duct tape were put on the nose and mouth. that is unsubstantiateed.

this person testified much beyond his ec per tease, and -- expertise, and that's what ashton relied upon. there's other evidence too. the whole sniffer machine in the corner has never been put into court. novel and unconfirmed evidence should not be allowed in according to the u.s. supreme court, but perry as the gatekeeper led a lot of -- let a lot of this material in be. molly: that's what the defense argued. let's take a listen to the defense lawyer, jose baez, and what he had to say in these final hours. take a listen. >> this is the level of absurdity, the desperation that this case, that this prosecution will take it to. they'll take it to the next level. they'll ask you to see things that aren't there. and they'll ask you to imagine fictional science. it's a fantasy of forensics, is what it is. a forensic fantasy.

molly: what are your thoughts on that wording, that this is a forensic fantasy? >> well, i think there's some merit to what he's saying, and my concern is about the forensics. bad forensic science drives out good forensic science, and i think that what's happened here is that this bodes ill for the future in other trials, that unless this is reversed on appeal which it may be, a guilty verdict, that more bad science will be permitted in by other judges. fantasy, you know, disappearing science that a heart image was present on duct tape that other people have looked at, the fbi lab had not seen. and the trainee who saw it was allowed to testify about seeing it, but it disappeared before she could take a photograph of it. that should not be allowed in, and that says, trust me, i'm

telling you the truth. and that's why sometimes innocent people get convicted. molly: thank you so much, dr. michael baden, for weighing in. of course it's up to the jury now. >> oh, yes. thank you, molly. jon: continue our discussion on this trial now with former prosecutor arnold schweitzer and nicole board. of course, the defense doesn't have to put on evidence, that's the prosecution's job. i wondered, donald, if you think the defense made a mistake in putting forward this whole caylee drowned, it was an accident and her father helped cover it up theory? >> jon, the outcome of this trial is going to depend largely on who made the worst mistakes during the trial. and i would have to say that jose baez made mistakes all the way from the beginning of his handling of this case through to closing arguments. he didn't have to make george anthony the bad guy. he didn't have to point to him and say that he had some reason for doing his daughter in. he didn't have to do any of that. all he had to do was rely on the

state's evidence and, perhaps, attack the scientific evidence. he didn't do that. so, you know, the outcome of this trial, i mean, we don't know what it's going be because you can't really rely on second guessing jurors and all the pundits that are out there. from my experience, you can't do that. but you can look at the mistakes that were made, and jose baez made a huge mistake of pointing the finger at george anthony during his closing arguments. jon: i thought both the prosecutor, the lead prosecutor jeff ashton and the assistant prosecutor, linda drain burdick, made a very powerful element into a closing argument. i want to play burdick's take on it and then get your response. >> no person would ever make the accidental death of a child look like murder. you heard dr. garavalia say 100% of the time when a child is involved in an accident, somebody tries to save them.

they want them to live. they call 911. jon: what linda burdick was talking about and what jeff ashton had said earlier was that the duct tape around the child's skull, um, made it look like murder and, supposedly again, according to the defense theory, nicole, this was an accident drowning. why would that, why would that duct tape be there? again, it seems to me it was an opening that the defense provided there when they brought forward this whole story about accidental drowning. >> i have to agree. i mean, to me it seems the defense would not have wanted to put themselves in the position of having to be second guessed about a theory that they put out there. i think it's a better thing to do to run through and attack, if you will, by cross-examination or your own witnesses the elements that the state has presented. and by opening yourself up to attack, you know, that really does pose a problem for the

defense because it can make the jurors lose sight of what it is they're supposed to be doing. they're not supposed to be comparing and contrasting the two different sides of the story, they're supposed to be determining whether or n the state has proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt. jon: i wonder, donald, if you can comment on what dr. baden was talking about just now, the admission of this sniffer machine evidence. i mean, it seemed to me that with cadaver dogs and just george anthony's own experience and so forth, the prosecution had quite a bit of evidence that there'd been human decomposition in that trunk, and why bring in a machine that's never been admitted before into evidence? >> well, look, dr. baden has his point of view because he's a doctor, he's into science. but this case was never about science. if you notice that jeff ashton made his closing argument start with a story, a very compelling story about the lies that were told by casey anthony. and he spent a little bit of time on the science.

today when he spoke again he spent a little bit of time in the science, and then this case was closed with fire and brimstone about the common sense arguments. it wasn't about the science. now, the prosecution has to put in some scientific evidence. i mean, they're duty-bound to do that. but jeff ashton even said, look, weigh this as you want, okay? don't listen to me, take this as how you want. but then he turned it over to his co-counsel who just drove the point home that this was about common sense. i don't think the jury's going to be caught up on the science because that's not how the prosecution handled this case. rightfully so. jon: nicole, as you point out, it only takes one juror. did the defense put enough doubt out there for this jury that one person might seize on it? >> well, the only people that know are those jurors, and really that's what a good defense attorney should be doing is trying to find that one juror at least who can hold their ground and decide that the case has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, so if he had

gotten to any of these jurors, that's all it takes. >> hey, nicole, you'd rather be sitting here than in the studio right now, wouldn't you? i mean, inside the courtroom, you don't want to be waiting for this verdict right now. >> oh, absolutely. i'd definitely want to be, you know -- i don't think it's going to take these people all that long, you know? but what he had to do was plant the seed in the one person's mind. so the question remains, has he done that? i guess we'll find out. jon: yep. nicole, donald, we'll see what happens. >> can thank you, jon. >> great. thank you. jon: and we will also get a wrap up, an in-depth wrap up coming up. >> absolutely. judge jeneane peer row as well, what happened today with the trial, what the jurors are discussing and what to expect when the verdict is read. don't miss that, that's 9 p.m. eastern right here on fox news channel. the brave men and women of the united states armed forces, they are celebrating the fourth of july holiday all around the world. but what does the u.s. troop drawdown in afghanistan mean for the war on terror?

♪ >> hello, i'm here in afghanistan, i just want to say happy fourth of july especially to my grandpa elmer swenson and, go twins. walls can talk. but it's our job to make them say something interesting. so how about this weekend we lrn some new tricks of the trade... then break out our doing clothes and get rolling. let's use some paint that helps us get the job done in record time and makes a statement when we're finished. we're lowering the cost of a new favorite color. more saving. more doing. th's the power of the home depot. get five dollars off gallon cans ofour top paint brds, now through july 4th only.

>> hi, everybody, good afternoon, i'm rick folbaum with the stars and stripes over my shoulder. when you see you at the top of the hour, we're going to talk about the jury that's deliberating in the casey anthony case. is this case so open and shut that the jury could reach their verdict very quickly? also, down in washington if no deal is reached in budget negotiations in the debt ceiling and cutting spending, is there are a chance the president could raise the debt ceiling without going through congress, that he could do it on his own? and would the supreme court let him do it? our panel will weigh in. and an emotional visit back to omaha beach, more manty --

normandy, france, for a member of the greatest generation. we'll talk live with a world war ii vet about what independence day means to him. that's on "america live" coming up at the top of the hour. hope you'll join us. jon: as we celebrate america's independence today, we also honor the brave men and women serve anything the armed services here at home and around the world. making incredible sacrifices to keep the rest of us free. one of the most dangerous places in the world right now, afghanistan. since the war there began 1,537 american service members have paid the ultimate sacrifice. 12,036 have been wounded. with the troop drawdown now, the obama administration is pulling out about 10,000 soldiers by the end of this year, more than 20,000 by the end of next summer. what does it mean for the gains the u.s. has made in fighting the taliban and al-qaeda in afghanistan? let's bring in major general bob scales, retired united states army and fox news military analyst. there's been a lot of, i guess,

confusion over this drawdown, general scales. some testimony in front of congress led by people like senator lindsey graham has made it clear that the pentagon wasn't exactly, well, onboard with the numbers that the president wants to withdraw, right? >> that's right, jon. as a matter of fact, i've spent the last week and a half around the pentagon and other places talking to active duty and retired military, and they don't talk about this campaign in terms of winning and losing, jon, they talk about it in the terms of risk. and to put a military spin on what's happening over there, as a generalule they believe that the surge has been very successful in the south in the kandahar and helmand province. but the military took risks in the northeast. that's that region between kabul and the pakistani border hoping that in 2012 they would have a very robust campaign there. well, of course, with the, with the withdrawal of the troops and

with truncating the campaign season, there's concern in the military that that's raised the level of risk of achieving the same success in the north that they've achieve inside the south, jon. jon: if you look at that area on the map, it's basically the pashtun region as i understand it. but everybody has said that you can't, you know, you can't kill your way out of afghanistan. it's not like having all kinds of troops in that area are going to wipe out the opposition. so what is the question, i guess, about the draw don? -- draw don? is. >> well, the drawdown is that the first step in achieving stability is to achieve security. that's what happened in the south where the taliban were pushed out of those regions with military force both using conventional and special operating forces, and that created a white space or a vacuum that could be filled with, you know, with the afghan national army and the afghan police to achieve stability. the question is, how do you

achieve security in the northeast if density of troops, the so-called troop to task ratio isn't high enough to do that effectively, to push out the bad guys long enough for the afghans to fill, to fill that void? and there's some question on the part of the military that the troop to task ratio won't be up to the task, so to speak, jon. jon: but you've also got the training of afghan armed forces going on. the fear, i guess s that the training won't necessarily have been completed to the point where they're going to be able to step in and fill the vacuum? >> absolutely. i think the consensus in the military today is that the afghan army has made enormous strides. not only are they robust in terms of numbers, but at the squad, company and platoon level they've achieved great results. still a lot to be said for leadership. the police, of course, far behind in terms of efficiency, corruption is still a problem in the police, so this ultimate security force is not yet up to the task.

the question is, do we have time over the next year, year and a half to bring these forces up to the task so they can fill that void in the northeast, jon. jon: well, we're able to say hi to our troops live around the world, and maybe you'd like to pass out a shoutout of your own. >> i absolutely would. i've talked to soldiers and marines on their fifth and sixth tour in the combat zone, and i have nothing but the utmost admiration for them, sticking with the fight and taking it to the enemy in these very difficult times, jon. jon: our hats are off to all of them. general scales, thank you. >> happy fourth, jon. jon: and to you. molly: well, the 96 president annual frth of -- 96th annual fourth of july hot dog-eating contest is underway. ever wonder how they can eat all those dogs? the doc is in next. >> the crowd counted down, a little surprise because juliet took off with the lead early on. interesting...

save up to 50% this tuesday and wednesday only. hotels.com. be smart. book smart. i was told to begin my aspirin regimen. i just didn't listen until i almost lost my life. my doctor's again ordered me to take aspirin. and i do. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. [ mike ] listen to the doctor. take it seriously. is actually finding choices the whole family will love. five flavors of chex are gluten-free, including the honey nut flavor. and it's nice for me to be able to syes" to something that they want to eat. [ male announcer ] chex cereal. five flavor gluten free

molly: nathan's international hot dog-eating contest underway. the black widow of the competition eating, tonya thomas, won the first-ever women's contest earlier today. she easily beat eight other competitors. thomas scarfing down 40 hot dogs to take the title there. the second place finisher only managing to put down a mere 29 and a half hot dogs. of course, the nutritionists point out that so many hot dogs could be bad for you, and glamourizing people eating them could be bad for our children. here with us is dr. marty mccarry, thanks for joining us. >> my pleasure, molly. molly: so what do you think? are hot dogs a superfood, or are they bad for you and perhaps we

shouldn't be glamourizing them? >> in public health these are called weapons of mass destruction. i don't have a problem with it, i think it's amusing that somebody could eat 60 hot dogs, but this organization that sponsors it is taking it to the local level. and in cities and towns across america from cleveland to allentown, pennsylvania, this organization is sponsoring overeating competitions. and it is promoting it now for women at the local level and even at amusement parks for children, and that's a concern. molly: i mean, we have a national obesity epidemic, a number of health professionals across the country have referred to it as a crisis. so, and then when we're glamourizing it in this contest and, as you mentioned, at the local level s there some way to balance these types of contests? >> yeah. i agree. this does promote it. it rewards it, there are

financial rewards. when you look at the countries with the longest life expectancy, molly -- france, japan -- they're not having overeating competitions of croissants or sushi bits. it is a uniquely american sort of glam orization, and this country is really promoting it. obesity has the highest price tag of any problem in health care, and you and i pay for that through higher premiums and medicare bills, and it's time we really send a good message to our children. so i applaud people that are standing up and saying we should ban these, but we should -- we shouldn't ban these, but we should stand against them. molly: as we see these folks slamming back 20, 30, 40 hot dogs in, you know, mere moments, how the election do they do it? -- how the heck do they do it? is. >> a lot of them describe eating lettuce and water and liquids beforehand for weeks, and it increases the capacity of their stomach, and their stomachs get massive. even though they're not that big

because their bodies are sort of designed for big storage, they do have major health problems down the road. i mean, most people that are overweight will at some point develop diabetes, go on ten medications, need joint replacements and be stents, and these are all things we pay for even though we're kind of amused by it in childhood. molly: thank you so much, dr. marty, for weighing in on this wild yearly competition. it's in its 96th year. thank you, doctor. >> thanks, molly. jon: a fox news alert and score one for the good guys on this fourth of july. mexican police say they have arrested the co-founder of the someday thats -- zetsa drug cartel wanted for the murders of those two american agents killed in that ambush in mexico. investigators have arrested aguilar, a $5 million bounty had

been on his head, and he is now under arrest. we'll have me more information for you in if just a bit on "happening now." really? 25 grams of protein. what do we have? all four of us, together? 24. he's low fat, too, and has 5 grams of sugars. i'll believe it when i--- [ both ] oooooh... what's shakin'? [ female announcer ] as you get older, protein is an important part of staying active and strong. new ensure high protein... fifty percent of your daily value of protein. low fat and five grams of sugars. see? he's a good egg. [ major nutrition ] new ensure hh protein. ensure! nutrition in charge! [ tires squeal ] an accidendoesn't have to slow you down. with better car replacement, available only from

liberty mutual insurance, the money to buy a car that's one model-year newer with 15,000 fewer miles on it. there's no other auto insurance product like it. better car replacement, available only from liberty mutual. that gets you a better car. call... or visit one of our local offices today, and we'll provide the coverage you need at the right price. liberty mutual auto insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy?

greg: we know you want to know who won the who the dog eating contest. don't make us watch the video again. jon: joey chestnut. >> reporter: this is the fifth time.